|
1
|
Siegel RL, Miller KD and Jemal A: Cancer
statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 67:7–30. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
2
|
Kimura T and Egawa S: Epidemiology of
prostate cancer in Asian countries. Int J Urol. 25:524–531.
2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
3
|
Saishin Gan Toukei (The Latest Cancer
Statistics in Japan). https://ganjoho.jp/reg_stat/statistics/stat/summary.html.
Accessed Jul 1, 2019.
|
|
4
|
Litwin MS and Tan HJ: The diagnosis and
treatment of prostate cancer: A review. JAMA. 317:2532–2542.
2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
5
|
Romero-Otero J, García-Gómez B,
Duarte-Ojeda JM, Rodríguez-Antolín A, Vilaseca A, Carlsson SV and
Touijer KA: Active surveillance for prostate cancer. Int J Urol.
23:211–218. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
6
|
Montironi R, Scattoni V, Mazzucchelli R,
Lopez-Beltran A, Bostwick DG and Montorsi F: Atypical foci
suspicious but not diagnostic of malignancy in prostate needle
biopsies (also referred to as ‘atypical small acinar proliferation
suspicious for but not diagnostic of malignancy’). Eur Urol.
50:666–674. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
7
|
Epstein JI and Herawi M: Prostate needle
biopsies containing prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical
foci suspicious for carcinoma: Implications for patient care. J
Urol. 175:820–834. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
8
|
Scattoni V, Roscigno M, Freschi M, Dehò F,
Raber M, Briganti A, Fantini G, Nava L, Montorsi F and Rigatti P:
Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) on extended prostatic
biopsies: Predictive factors of cancer detection on repeat
biopsies. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 77:31–36. 2005.PubMed/NCBI
|
|
9
|
Borboroglu PG, Sur RL, Roberts JL and
Amling CL: Repeat biopsy strategy in patients with atypical small
acinar proliferation or high grade prostatic intraepithelial
neoplasia on initial prostate needle biopsy. J Urol. 166:866–870.
2001.PubMed/NCBI
|
|
10
|
Carroll PR, Parsons JK, Andriole G,
Bahnson RR, Barocas DA, Catalona WJ, Dahl DM, Davis JW, Epstein JI,
Etzioni RB, et al: Prostate cancer early detection, version 1.2014
Featured updates to the NCCN guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw.
12:1211–1219. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
11
|
Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J,
Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, Mason M, Matveev V, Wiegel T,
Zattoni F, et al: EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1:
Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative
intent-update 2013. Eur Urol. 65:124–137. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
12
|
Ynalvez LA, Kosarek CD, Kerr PS, Mahmoud
AM, Eyzaguirre EJ, Orihuela E, Sonstein JN and Williams SB:
Atypical small acinar proliferation at index prostate biopsy:
Rethinking the re-biopsy paradigm. Int Urol Nephrol. 50:1–6.
2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
13
|
Leone L, Lacetera V, Montironi R, Cantoro
U, Conti A, Sbrollini G, Quaresima L, Mariani L, Muzzonigro G and
Galosi AB: Biopsy follow-up in patients with isolated atypical
small acinar proliferation (ASAP) in prostate biopsy. Arch Ital
Urol Androl. 86:332–335. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
14
|
Leone A, Rotker K, Butler C, Mega A, Li J,
Amin A, Schiff SF, Pareek G, Golijanin D and Renzulli JF II:
Atypical small acinar proliferation: Repeat biopsy and detection of
high grade prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer.
2015(810159)2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
15
|
Leone A, Gershman B, Rotker K, Butler C,
Fantasia J, Miller A, Afiadata A, Amin A, Zhou A, Jiang Z, et al:
Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP): Is a repeat biopsy
necessary ASAP? A multi-institutional review. Prostate Cancer
Prostatic Dis. 19:68–71. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
16
|
Warlick C, Feia K, Tomasini J, Iwamoto C,
Lindgren B and Risk M: Rate of Gleason 7 or higher prostate cancer
on repeat biopsy after a diagnosis of atypical small acinar
proliferation. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 18:255–259.
2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
17
|
Koca O, Calışkan S, Oztürk Mİ, Güneş M and
Karaman MI: Significance of atypical small acinar proliferation and
high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in prostate biopsy.
Korean J Urol. 52:736–740. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
18
|
Ryu JH, Kim YB, Lee JK, Kim YJ and Jung
TY: Predictive factors of prostate cancer at repeat biopsy in
patients with an initial diagnosis of atypical small acinar
proliferation of the prostate. Korean J Urol. 51:752–756.
2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
19
|
Srirangam V, Rai BP, Abroaf A, Agarwal S,
Tadtayev S, Foley C, Lane T, Adshead J and Vasdev N: Atypical small
acinar proliferation and high grade prostatic intraepithelial
neoplasia: Should we be concerned? An observational cohort study
with a minimum follow-up of 3 years. Curr Urol. 10:199–205.
2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
20
|
Cool DW, Romagnoli C, Izawa JI, Chin J,
Gardi L, Tessier D, Mercado A, Mandel J, Ward AD and Fenster A:
Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy
for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical
small acinar proliferation. Can Urol Assoc J. 10:342–348.
2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
21
|
Aglamis E, Kocaarslan R, Yucetas U, Toktas
G, Ceylan C, Doluoglu OG and Unluer E: How many cores should be
taken in a repeat biopsy on patients in whom atypical small acinar
proliferation has been identified in an initial transrectal
prostate biopsy? Int Braz J Urol. 40:605–612. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
22
|
Merrick GS, Galbreath RW, Bennett A,
Butler WM and Amamovich E: Incidence, grade and distribution of
prostate cancer following transperineal template-guided mapping
biopsy in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation. World
J Urol. 35:1009–1013. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
23
|
Scattoni V, Roscigno M, Freschi M,
Briganti A, Fantini GV, Bertini R, Salonia A, Montorsi F and
Rigatti P: Predictors of prostate cancer after initial diagnosis of
atypical small acinar proliferation at 10 to 12 core biopsies.
Urology. 66:1043–1047. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
24
|
Ficarra V, Novella G, Novara G, Galfano A,
Pea M, Martignoni G and Artibani W: The potential impact of
prostate volume in the planning of optimal number of cores in the
systematic transperineal prostate biopsy. Eur Urol. 48:932–937.
2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
25
|
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center,
PSA Doubling Time. https://www.mskcc.org/nomograms/prostate/psa_doubling_time.
Accessed Aug 1, 2019.
|
|
26
|
Paller CJ, Olatoye D, Xie S, Zhou X,
Denmeade SR, Eisenberger MA, Antonarakis ES, Carducci MA and Rosner
GL: The effect of the frequency and duration of PSA measurement on
PSA doubling time calculations in men with biochemically recurrent
prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 17:28–33.
2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
27
|
Letran JL, Meyer GE, Loberiza FR and
Brawer MK: The effect of prostate volume on the yield of needle
biopsy. J Urol. 160:1718–1721. 1998.PubMed/NCBI
|
|
28
|
Leibovici D, Shilo Y, Raz O, Stav K,
Sandbank J, Segal M and Zisman A: Is the diagnostic yield of
prostate needle biopsies affected by prostate volume? Urol Oncol.
31:1003–1005. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
29
|
Nakai Y, Tanaka N, Shimada K, Konishi N,
Miyake M, Anai S and Fujimoto K: Review by urological pathologists
improves the accuracy of Gleason grading by general pathologists.
BMC Urol. 15(70)2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
|
